Old Testament Violence....Start at the Other End

I happened upon a website a few weeks ago. Don't ask me how I got there....but as always it was a result of clicking a link that led to another link....to another link and so on and so forth. Just another case of divine serendipity, I suppose.  

The name of the site is Redeeming God. It is authored by Jeremy Myers. I landed on a longish series of blog posts that take a close look at God's culpability for the violence, bloodshed and carnage in the OT.  

Like me, the author cannot reconcile the OT scriptures, taken at face value, with the expressed image of God that we see in Jesus.  

When we seek to understand the violence of God in the Old Testament, we must begin by looking at the end. We must begin by looking at the person and work of Jesus Christ.  Jeremy Myers

My intention is to post excerpts from his series and any of my own thoughts that are sparked by what I read. That is my intention...... 

I've already written about this topic in years past....here....and here....and here....and quite a few other posts under the tag Old Testament.

And one more link….

Crooks and Liars published an article on Monday about this Dominionist/Christian Reconstructionist stuff.  Most of it is a rehash of the other two articles I posted the other day….but if you scroll down to the bottom of the article (before the comments) there is a 7ish minute video about Greg Boyd’s view of the kingdom of God and how it relates to politics. 

I really like Greg Boyd and I’ve written about him and his trailblazing sermon series, The Cross and the Sword and other assorted posts about him and his theology HERE….  He lost a substantial portion of his church when he preached that series (which inspired his book, The Myth of a Christian Nation)…..something like 25%….a thousand people out of a congregation of four thousand.  That was back in 2004 or so. 

I’m not going to beat this dead horse much longer.  I’ve written about Dominionism….researched it enough to know that it stinks to high heaven.  It is the “Christian” version of Sharia Law…which also stinks to high heaven.  They share more similarities than differences…..with some of the more hard core proponents actually believing that homosexuality, teenage rebellion and blasphemy should be capital offenses.  In their view, they ARE capital offenses since they get a lot of their guidelines from the Old Testament.  Welcome to Uganda anyone? 

Now…would they/could they infiltrate our government and actually make any of these changes?  Do any of the presidential hopefuls truly believe this stuff?  Are their reported ties made up….exaggerated….fabricated?  Is it just more of the ssdd mudslinging that goes on in politics….with both sides equally guilty?  I don’t know. 

If you have the time and the inclination, research it.  Google it.  Pick up Rushdoony’s 3 volume “encyclopedia sized” books (remember World Book anyone?) The Institutes of Biblical Law.  Or check out Gary North’s site (Rushdoony’s son in law) with 90 free e-books by various authors defining some of their beliefs.  Hmmmmm….just at a quick glance, I see several books based on Leviticus are available. 

But my two cents worth is this….it is the inclination of fallen man to try to set up, cover up, prop up, make up their worldly kingdoms.  A kingdom with minute, explicit, all encompassing rules and regulations based on their interpretation of their own particular holy book.  Deeming this right and that right….this wrong and that wrong.  Meticulous systemS of punishments and consequences.  It is all based in the knowledge of good and evil….fruit from the tree that God told Adam not to eat of.  And it matters not if they are gleaning their rules from the Quran or the Holy Bible….if they are reading it from a knowledge of good and evil perspective….they will never get it right. 

Thoughts?  Comments? 

No Clean Hands – the Rise of the Christian and Islamic “Empires”…

If you check out the following graph that depicts the breakdown of world religions, two clear winners emerge….eating up over half of the “pie.” Christianity and Islam.  Together they account for 55% of the world’s population.  That is a big chunk. 

 

 

An article in the Huffington Post (the namesake of this series) claims the reason is

....both Christianity and Islam owe their global success not so much to the magic words in their scriptures as to their effectiveness in practicing forced conversions. Oh, yes, we all know about the growth of the Islamic Empire, whose berobed foot-soldiers held a scimitar in one hand and the Quran in the other. But pull that beam out of your eye, dear Christian reader, and remember the Celts, the West Africans, the Indians of the Plains, the Hawaiians, and countless other peoples whose religions and languages were violently suppressed that they might know salvation through “our Lord Jesus Christ.”

In my journeys around the internet…while reading up on the controversy of the “mosque at ground zero”…. I came across many articles, comments and blog posts warning that the goal of Islam is to take over the US and institute Sharia Law. Many see this as a real threat.

Recently, I’ve been revisiting a topic I first ran across a while back (and wrote about here on this blog)…the Dominionists….the Christian Reconstructionists…the “take America back for God” folks. They  come in many flavors and degrees..but their goal is to make American a theocracy and institute Biblical Law.  Their interpretation of Biblical Law is very literal and very narrow.  Some advocate reinstituting Biblical punishments like the stoning of homosexuals, adulterers etc. (Sound similar to the oppression found in many middle eastern countries?  The Taliban by another name is still the Taliban.)

And the thing is…the history of both religions is tainted with forced conversions, tyranny, oppression, and theocratic rule. 

Pot…meet kettle. 

Revisiting the Gay Wars....

I read an article on line (where else?) last night...about a gay man who spoke about his life, his coming out, his families reaction, etc. at a very conservative Christian college.  It was a really interesting article but...dumb me...I did not bookmark it and for the life of me....I cannot find it in my "history" on AOL or Chrome...and I can't get it to come up in a google search.  I hate when that happens! Alas...no link to the article.  Also...recently on the yahoo e-list, Christian Universalism, where I am a (mostly lurking) member, another battle in the gay wars was waged.  No winners...and one (very) conservative member there, stomped off in a huff...supposedly never to return. These two things jogged my memory about this post that was hiding out in the queue. It was written a month or so ago but shuffled to the holding tank (the Someday/Maybe file)  which comes in very handy on a morning like this when I am hung over (figuratively speaking) from staying up too late to watch Gray's Anatomy.   Queued post follows....

On the blog Pomomusings, in a post written about a year ago...

The Bible and Homosexuality, Enough with the Bible Already...

the author suggests that, for those who are steeped in condemning....or defending.....homosexuality using the Bible as their weapon of choice, they might want to set the Bible aside for a while.

Christians have a history of using the Bible as a weapon (this is a bit of a caricature – but probably not far from the truth). Whether being used to condone slavery, oppress women or support wars, it’s clear the Bible has been misused by many [insert here accusations that I as well am misusing the Bible with my hope for acceptance of LGBT folk]. When the Bible becomes used as a weapon, as a tool for discrimination, as a way in which people can justify beliefs of hatred and injustice – one has to think and wonder if we haven’t gone horribly wrong somewhere.

For some, I believe the Bible has become an idol. Some place the Bible above Jesus’ compassion and love, Jesus’ radical inclusivity, and hold steadfast onto what they believe to be the correct interpretation of a small amount of verses that speak about same-sex relations. To those who repeatedly start quoting Leviticus and Romans verses as soon as anyone brings up the topic of homosexuality, I’d suggest perhaps you stick your Bible back up on the shelf for awhile. Perhaps it should collect a little bit of dust. And maybe, just maybe, you need to go out and grab coffee with someone who’s gay. Maybe you need to hear their story, learn about what they’ve been through, how they’ve experienced Christians and the church.

He goes on to say

So I’m not arguing that we should throw out the Bible; but at least for some people, it might be more productive – and better for society – if they put the Bible aside for awhile, stopped listening to the hateful rhetoric of James Dobson & Friends, and engaged in some thoughtful reflection and conversation with the LGBT community.

Isn't that the truth?

Check out this website. Some very interesting writings reside there. Including a 7 or 8 part series summarizing the book Jesus, the Bible and Homosexuality by Jack Rogers.

The Letter versus the Spirit of the Law

Because the AFA takes such a legalistic view of things...seeing mainly black and white and not any gray, they find themselves in a dilemma. What do they do with the Gap now that the are compliant with the rules for inclusion in the yellow...and possibly even the green..... list of retailers. Since the Gap now uses the word Christmas in its holiday advertising, they are (technically) compliant. Technically, yes, but the commercial (which I really like) is very satirical and seems to poke fun at the whole issue. The fact that they are part of the brunt of the joke has not escaped the AFA. They are conducting a poll to determine whether the Gap's standing on their "Naughty or Nice" list (no kidding...that is the name of the list) should be changed.

Even though I totally disagree with the whole list and the whole premise of these holiday wars between the secular and the non-secular...I would have to vote...no...don't change the Gap's listings from red to green. Even though they now qualify for inclusion in the green list (since they comply with the letter of the "law) they do not qualify based on the spirit of the AFA law (aka rules and requirements)

Let me be clear. I totally disagree with this whole thing...the whole naughty or nice list...the Christmas wars. I am focusing on this particular situation as an example of what happens when we follow the letter and not the spirit. Dwelling in the land of black and white is not as clear cut as one might think. For me, dwelling as I so often do in the gray, I can clearly see that the Gap does not comply with the spirit of the requirements the AFA sets for inclusion in the green list....which is to embrace and honor Christmas. In other words, oftentimes when you filter things through the letter and not the spirit of the law...you are screwed.

Which in a round about way brings me back to something I posted last year at Christmas time. And I am going to repost it this year because I think it gets to the heart of what I mentioned in my first post...The Joy and Spirit of Christ. It is a letter from God to his children.

Dear Children,
It has come to my attention that many of you are upset that folks are taking My Son's name out of the season. Maybe you've forgotten that I didn't send my Son in December, it was some of your ancestors who decided to celebrate My Son's birthday at what was, in ancient times, a pagan festival; although, I do appreciate Jesus being remembered...anytime.
How I personally feel about this celebration can probably be most easily understood by those of you who have been blessed with children of your own. I don't care what you call the day. If you want to celebrate Jesus' birth just,
GET ALONG AND LOVE ONE ANOTHER.

If it bothers you that the town in which you live doesn't allow a scene depicting My Son's birth, then make room on your lawn for the nativity scene on your own front lawn. If all my followers did that there wouldn't be any need for such a scene on the town square because there would be many of them all around town.

Stop worrying about the fact that people are calling the tree a holiday tree, instead of a Christmas tree. It was I who made all the trees. You can remember me anytime you see a tree.

Instead of fusing over trimmings and traditions, consider giving My Son one of the gifts below this Christmas…

1. Instead of writing protest letters objecting to the way My birthday is being celebrated, write letters of love and hope to soldiers away from home. They are terribly afraid and lonely this time of year. I know, they tell Me all the time.

2. Visit someone in a nursing home. You don't have to know them personally. They just need to know that someone cares about them.

3. Instead of writing George complaining about the wording on the cards his staff sent out this year, why don't you write and tell him that you'll be praying for him and his family this year. Then follow up. It will be nice hearing from you again.

4. Instead of giving your children a lot of gifts you can't afford and they don't need, spend time with them. Tell them the story of My birth and why I came to live with you down here. Hold them in your arms and remind them that I love them.

5. Pick someone who's hurt you in the past, forgive them, and give them the gift of a future-free from the pain, shame, and guilt of yesterday's yuck.

6. Did you know that someone in your town will attempt to take their own life this season because they feel so alone and hopeless? Since you don't know who that person is, try giving everyone you meet a warm smile, it could make the difference. Also, you might consider supporting the local Hot-Line: they talk with people like that every day.

7. Instead of nit picking about what the retailer in your town calls the holiday, be patient with the people who work there. Give them a warm smile and a kind word. Even if they aren't allowed to wish you a "Merry Christmas" that doesn't keep you from wishing them one.

8. If you really want to make a difference, support a missionary, especially one who takes My love and Good News to those who have never heard My name. You may already know someone like that.

9. Here's a good one. There are individuals and whole families in your town who not only will have no "Christmas" tree, but neither will they have any presents to give or receive. Be sensitive to the needs of others. A few cans of food or a simple gift can go along way towards good will on earth.

10. Finally if you want to make a statement about your belief in Me, then behave like a Christian. Don't do things in secret that you wouldn't do in My presence. Let people know by your actions that you are one of mine.

Don't forget; I am God and can take care of Myself. Please, if you love me, love my children-all of them, especially the ones that challenge your traditions. I'll take care of all the rest.

Invite others to a Christmas festival that has more to do with eternity than all the trimmings and traditions of December 25th.

"Merry Christmas!" means: "I love you." - God

Isn't That The Holy Spirit's Job?

You know, I love it when something seems to fall from cyberspace....kerplunk...right into my lap. I take it as confirmation....like God's go ahead...his "a-okay" concerning  some of these more controversial issues I take a look at and voice an opinion on.

Sometimes I do pause, wondering what the more conservative folks who happen to end up here on my blog....by chance or by choice....think about some of this stuff.  There are several I know who visit here regularly. But a girls gotta' do what a girls gotta' do...and so I write.  And God has been so good to lead me on these exhilarating google searches where the most interesting and varied tidbits of information appear (like magic) on my laptop screen.

Today I was a bit surprised how stumbling on the blog post by Nadia...and the subsequent "research" about her fits so well with what I have been writing about.  I wasn't surprised that she is considered a rebel...but it appears that she is very gay inclusive. There is no hint in anything I've read about her that she herself is gay...just that she is very inclusive and supportive of gays. Where did I find a lot of this information?  Oh...where I often find some of my best quotes and information about heretics.  The "anti sites." 

Anti everything and everyone. The particular anti site that I happened upon via google is an amazingly PERFECT example of the kind of self righteous, error exposing, sola scriptura Christians who raise the hackles on the back of my neck. They totally...totally...piss me off.  Modern day Pharisees at their absolute best (worst?)

This one is called Apprising Ministries...following is their mission statement:

This time in which we find ourselves is one of rapid change, revisionist history and so called "postmodernism." Is it any wonder that people wonder what to believe, and even who they can trust?

(snotty remark from Cindi...perhaps they should trust the Holy Spirit...you know the Counselor, Helper, Advocate, Intercessor, Strengthener, Standby (ty Amplified Bible) that Jesus promised would lead us into all truth)

Today faithful believers in Christ face more and more pressure to be “politically correct” — which in the end is simply a mask for relativism. And while the nature of God, and the beautiful simplicity of His Gospel remain the same, the cornucopia of attacks leveled at our Lord’s Church by the enemy are increasingly fierce and constantly changing.

Apprising Ministries is a non-profit and tax-exempt labor extending as a fully integrated auxiliary from Connecticut River Baptist Church (CRBC). Rooted in classic, historic, orthodox Christian theology, AM, as in Awaken—It’s Morning, is actually to be a bit similar to the type of ministry done by Dr. Walter Martin (1928-1989), founder of the Christian Research Institute, only in an updated fashion. The idea is to also handle Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism, apostate Roman Catholicism as well as to deal with issues related to semi-pelagian postevangelicalism and the postliberalism of the Emergent Church in addition to counter-cult evangelism.

As they say in "As Seen On TV" commercials...But wait!!! There's more!!!  I found an anti site blog that is a "reader's digest" of sorts...Reformata. It compiles about 10 or so anti-cult blogs under one roof.  One stop shopping.  You need never be caught unaware of some new perverted, heretical doctrine because this group of "humble" bloggers are on top of things and with all those eyes peeled looking for heretics, none will slip under their radar.  Their self description follows:

Because the Church must always be reforming, we believe we must ever be analyzing our faith and practice and adjusting it into greater conformity with God’s unchanging Word. This involves defending the truth by addressing and exposing error, false doctrine, and sin within the body, as well as edifying believers through the clear proclamation of biblical Truth.

(Again, usurping the clearly stated authority and function of the Holy Spirit who "will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment")

This must always be done circumspectly and humbly,

(Humbly? ROFLMAO)

yet boldly and with Scriptural clarity. The cancers of sin and heresy must be condemned for what they are, yet the antidote, God’s grace in the Gospel, must always be presented.  It is for these purposes that the Reformata blog network exists. May God be glorified in using weak vessels such as ourselves to proclaim the glorious Gospel of his Son.

More tomorrow about Nadia's sermon presenting her views after the historic ELCA vote to include gays as clergy in their denomination.  More about Nadia (the more I read about her the more I like her) and my thoughts and notions about her views and her ministry. 

Because It Is Holy? Part 2

The Euthyphro records a dialogue between Plato's teacher, Socrates and another young philosopher named Euthyphro.  The conversation is about holiness..piety. Euthyphro is in the process of prosecuting his own father for murder. One of the family's slaves killed another slave. Euthyphro's father had the (still living) slave bound and thrown in a ditch while he awaited advice from a seer about what to do with him. In the meantime, the slave in the ditch died from neglect.  In Greek society, slaves were truly a dime a dozen.  Fathers were revered.  Still, Euthyphro was convinced the gods were displeased and felt it was his duty to prosecute his father.  He seems quite confident in his ability to make judgements and act accordingly...not to mention he knows the will and opinions of the gods.  Euthyphro is certain he knows what piety is and what it demands.

I've known people like him. They see only blacks and whites, never any shades of gray.  Everything is either right or wrong and there are clear cut, no-brainer boundaries separating the two.  They see no extenuating circumstances, no reasons, no excuses. They are judge and jury and they know instantly if anyone has stepped across the line. There is no mercy of the court. There is little compassion, only judgement. In my life, I have seen them show up as believers and non-believers.

So Euthyphro is sure he is doing the right thing. He tells Socrates that this kind of decision is

"only for a man already far advanced in point of wisdom"

Sounds like a know it all to me....

And perhaps to Socrates as well because he continues to question how Euthyphro knows with such surety what is holy...what is pious.  Euthyphro replies:

"If I did not have an accurate knowledge of all that, I should be good for nothing, and Euthyphro would be no different from the general run of men"

Hmmmm, pretty full of himself!  

And so the conversation about holiness goes round and round...how to define it, what it is exactly...a discussion that never really reaches a conclusion or an agreement.  Euthyphro seems sure he has all the answers but Socrates, in his search for an answer, keep tripping Euthyphro up with questions.  At one point Euthyphro declares,

"I simply don't know how to tell you what I think.  Somehow everything that we put forward keeps moving about us in a circle, and nothing will stay where we put it." 

Must be very disconcerting for a guy who knows everything to not be able to keep track of the conversation.  He is ready to quit talking  and tells Socrates that he has a million things to do (getting ready for the prosecution and all) and he must end the conversation then and there...and they can continue "another time"....but Socrates declares:

"As for me, I will never give up until I know."

According the book I mentioned in yesterday's post, there are some questions that come up in the course of this dialogue between Socrates and Euthyphro; questions we need to ask ourselves. 

• What is the connection between God and goodness or holiness?
• Is God bound to some kind of moral code?
• If God commands torture (war/jihad/sacrifice) is it good? Is it wrong?
• If torture etc. is wrong regardless of whether God commands it, does goodness have an existence independent of God?
• Does the belief that God cannot violate a standard of goodness lessen his omnipotence?
• Does God limit himself because it is not his nature to command actions that are not "good"?

As the comedian Bill Chappelle declares:

Wow. ... That's a good question. ... Is `I don't know' an acceptable answer?”

Guilty...

When I signed onto my computer this morning, one of the first headlines I noticed on my AOL home page was about OJ Simpson's verdict. He was found guilty of kidnapping, armed robbery and ten other assorted charges, ironically THIRTEEN YEARS TO THE DAY of his acquittal of the murder of Nicole Brown and Ronald Goldman. There are all kinds of articles on the internet about his guilt but one of the most eclectic articles has to be HOW EVIDENCE AGAINST LUCIFER AND OJ HAS BEEN DISMISSED. It is written by Mike Clute of God's Last Call Ministries.

Mike Clute is a former (?) 7th Day Adventist pastor who believes the god who was responsible for the horrendous things done in the OT was satan and not the one true almighty God...the God we whose expressed image we see in Jesus. When I explored the many articles at his site a while back, there were many of his writings I agreed with but not all...and one must, I think, read with discernment and the guidance of the Holy Spirit. With the enlightenment of some of the teachings of Eckhart Tolle, I'm not sure if I would disagree with more of his beliefs or not. He is very much into end times prophecy and seems to have a dualistic point of view. God vs. Satan. I still have not formed a definitive opinion on whether or not satan is an actual being or the manifestation of the carnal mind/egoic mind/painbody. It has been awhile since I've read there but when I saw the OJ verdict, the article I've linked to came to mind.

I revisited the article this morning. He attributes OJ's innocent verdict to the same unwillingness of many people to see the truth of the evidence about God and Satan and who is responsible for what. Even though the article is slanted toward supporting his point of view spiritually, it is filled with facts from the trial and excerpts from many of the books written on the subject. It is an easy read.

As I was reading the article again this morning, a statement I probably skimmed over the first time stood out as if it had been written in bold print, size 20 font. It was a remark reportedly made by Marsha Clark at the end of the trial...after the innocent verdict. Mike Clute writes:

I really liked Clark's comments about the verdict and its aftermath. She realized "I'm still here." She wanted everyone to see that she had put herself through "hell" for the right thing. "I had to believe that suffering was part of something bigger. Justice, like the will of God, doesn't always manifest itself on the spur of the moment. It doesn't always come when you think it should. You just gotta wait it out."

Wow....

Written Not With Ink....

I am reading through ANE again....slowly because I am reading a lot of other stuff too....stuff I've printed from online, scripture etc. And I am taking notes, copying down quotes from the book that strike me (and there are a LOT of things that strike me). And as was the case the last time I read it, so much of what he has to say brings scripture to mind. Something struck me last night when I read the following quote from Eckhart...which is on page 72ish.

When you are in touch with that dimension within yourself - and being in touch with it is your natural state, not some miraculous achievement - all your actions and relationships will reflect the oneness with all life that you sense deep within. This is love. Laws, commandments, rules, and regulations are necessary for those who are cut off from who they are, the Truth within. They prevent the worst excesses of the ego, and often they don't even do that. "Love and do what you will," said St. Augustine.

It reminded me that the Law was referred to as a schoolmaster or tutor to "bring us into Christ" and that the Law was "only a shadow of the good things to come and not the very image of them." In Jeremiah God promises to write his Laws on our hearts....and in 2 Corinthians it refers to us as a "letter of Chrst written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God, not on tables of stone but on tablets of human hearts" Isn't that the gist of what Eckhart is saying? Doesn't it say the same thing?

It reminded me, too, of something that Keith has pointed out many times and that is that the Ten Commandments are actually promises....things that will naturally occur when we live out of our christ nature. Thou shalt not kill...thou shalt not steal. If we are living out of the christ within (or as Eckhart refers to it on page 71, the indwelling God) we will not need laws that tell us not to kill because it will be totally against our nature. Jesus summed the Law up into two commands....love the Lord God with all your heart, strength, soul and mind and love your neighbor as yourself. If you love your neighbor as yourself it pretty much eliminates the temptation to steal from him, run around with his wife, kill him....bear false witness against him. So the 10 commandments state first of all "thou shalt have no other Gods before me" Doesn't the egoic mind set itself up as "god" convincing us that is who we really are....and seems to me to be reflected scripturally in the following verse:

Don't let anyone deceive you in any way, for that day will not come until the rebellion occurs and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the man doomed to destruction. He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God's temple, proclaiming himself to be God. 2 Thes. 2:3-4

Hmmmm....who is the man of lawlessness? The egoic mind? The Painbody?

Where is God's temple?

Don't you know that your body is a temple that belongs to the Holy Spirit 1 Corinthians 6:19).

So in total unconsciousness, we allow the egoic mind to take over our temples...and depending on how unconscious we are, we might not have a clue we are not the thoughts and attachments and roles rattling around in our heads. The apostle Paul referred to the indwelling God as a MYSTERY...the mystery of "the Christ in you, the hope of Glory" and reiterates in 2 Corinthians 13:5 when he says...."do you not know yourselves that Jesus Christ is in you?"

I want to add that a lot of the understanding I am coming to now is based, in many ways, on the things Keith has tried to teach me for years. I did not want to hear about the adamic/carnal man vs the christman. It made no sense. In fact, it sounded as if God was trying to kill me off...and I wanted no part of that. Keith used to say that "adam doesn't want to die" and that used to really piss me off. It was the egoic (carnal/adamic/earthly) Cindi that was getting miffed because...well, the egoic mind does not want to die. I should also add that Keith is not interested in Eckhart's teachings at this point and that most of the opinions expressed on this blog do not represent his opinions or his beliefs. The irony is that his teachings helped to form many of my beliefs. Go figure.....

God Is Your Enemy...at least according to Fred Phelps

I ran across a few articles today about the 11 million dollar ruling against Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church for picketing the funeral of a fallen soldier. The soldier's dad brought the lawsuit against Phelps and his clan in an attempt to send a message and hopefully spare other families the added heartache he endured because of the actions of this "church."

Albert Snyder of York, Pa., sued the church after members demonstrated at the March 2006 funeral of his son, Lance Cpl. Matthew Snyder, who was killed in Iraq.

Church members routinely picket funerals of military personnel killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, claiming that the soldiers are dying because the nation is too tolerant of homosexuality. They carry signs such as "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God hates fags."

This ABC News article goes into some of the particulars of the case...and includes some ironic quotes from the church leadership. The church mainly consists of people related to the Phelps...72 in all....counting a recent addition who is now 2 months old.

11 of Fred Phelps' 13 children are lawyers.....including his daughter Shirley Phelps-Roper. After listening to a phone interview I found on the National Post website I find it hard to believe she ever made it through law school. She sounded just like a few belligerent drunks I've had to deal with in my days as a waitress....or the ravings and ramblings of someone who is mentally ill. Her harsh, crude way of speaking was even more noticeable because of the contrast with the interviewer...a Canadian women from Toronto with the melodic, sing song accent many Canadians have. (Remember, I am married to a Canadian and I mean no offense or slur against the charming accent of Canadian women.) Shirley sounded just plain ignorant. And rude. And hateful....something she denies in the ABC article.

"Hateful message? It's a kind message. It's the only kindness of this hour," she said. "And we do it on our own time and we do it from a pure heart and kindness."

Uh-huh...yeah...right. She provides a glimpse of this kindness when she goes on to say that parents mourning their children who died in war "did not do their duty to their child."

"Those people that are sitting around there with their crocodile tears … the Lord, God entrusted them with that tiny baby," she said. "They raised the child. There's only two ways to raise your child. You either raise them by the standards of God or you do, in fact, raise them for the devil."

And whose standards did Fred use when he raised his 13 children?

In the National Post interview she mentions that the trial provided an opportunity for them to do a bit of missionary outreach. "We have signs and we know how to carry them." she said in her course, grating voice.

"In his compassion, for the last 17 years, God has sent his servants — the apple of his eye — from this humble little church to warn you daily to flee from the wrath to come.” the church said in a statement.

I'm afraid that these people have no idea what compassion is and they are a million miles away from what Jesus meant when he declared, "if you had understood what this meant, I desire mercy not sacrifice you would not have condemned the innocent"

Hebrews 9:22

On Beautiful Heresy the subject of sacrifice was recently discussed. Someone brought up Hebrews 9:22. I have some articles saved in my favorites that deal with this verse. I was looking through a few the other night (ala google). There were some that discussed Girard's view of Hebrews. In one of his books (Things Hidden, I think) he pretty much excluded Hebrews as a valid book in scripture because it seemed to condone rather than dismiss the sacrificial system. He also thought that it was the only book in the Bible that did not expose mimetic violence and the resulting sacrifice of a scapegoat. He has since reversed that opinion. There were several articles written which explained Hebrews from a non-sacrificial point of view. I was too tired to delve into them. You know...when you read the words but none of them light in the brain?? As to Hebrews 9:22, yes....I have wondered about it. I find something curious about the verse but I have not figured out the significance of it yet. In most of the translations it emphasizes that it is the law...according to the law, under the law, the law requires the shedding of blood.


Quote:
And according to the law almost all things are purified with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission. KJV

Indeed, under the law almost everything is purified with blood, and without the shedding of blood there is no forgiveness of sins.

ESV and the NASB translates it in a really interesting way:

And according to the Law, {one may} almost {say,} all things are cleansed with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness.

When I looked up the meaning of the word translated as "law" in the verse in the original languages I found the following meanings.


anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command

a) of any law whatsoever

1) a law or rule producing a state approved of God a) by the observance of which is approved of God

2) a precept or injunction

3) the rule of action prescribed by reason

b) of the Mosaic law, and referring, acc. to the context. either to the volume of the law or to its contents

c) the Christian religion: the law demanding faith, the moral instruction given by Christ, esp. the precept concerning love

d) the name of the more important part (the Pentateuch), is put for the entire collection of the sacred books of the OT

Hmmmm......phrases that stick out to me are

"of any law whatsoever" whose law? Man's law or God's law?

"anything established, anything received by usage, a custom, a law, a command anything established"? By who?

"anything received by usage"? From who? A custom? Whose custom?

"A law, a command"? Again, whose law, whose command?

"a precept or injunction" originating from where?

"the rule of action prescribed by reason? Whose reason?

His ways are above our ways...his thoughts above our thoughts....so the sacrificial system was prescribed by whose reason? Man's or God's??? These are all just things I am musing about. So many things to muse, so little time in which to do it!!! Feel like I am on spiritual overload sometimes....mulling over these things in my mind... These definitions, of course, are only part of the meaning of the word as used in scripture but I think they should give us pause....especially when we consider some of the other verses that clearly tell us God abhorred the sacrificial system....and that he did not command it or desire it.....but rather desired "Mercy Not Sacrifice"

Did Jesus Condone Sacrifice?

Why did Jesus tell people to sacrifice at the temple???

Mat 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

Mark 1:44 and Luke 5:14 are both very similar.

Seemingly that is a point scored for the view that God DID demand blood sacrifice I did some poking around with the help of google....and from what I read the following was what "Moses commanded"

Though healed of his leprosy, the man was not legally clean until declared so by the priest. The priest alone could readmit him to the congregation. The local priest inspected the healed leper, and if he was found clean or cured, he was purified by the use of two birds, cedar wood, scarlet and hyssop, razor and bath. After seven days he was again inspected, and if still cured the priest repaired with him to the temple, where he offered the gift for his cleansing, which was three lambs, with flour and oil; or if the leper was poor, one lamb and two doves or pigeons, with flour and oil (Le 14:19-22).


No doubt about it....there was animal sacrifice in what "Moses commanded" but then it occurred to me when rereading the first line of the excerpt above.....

Though healed of his leprosy, the man was not legally clean until declared so by the priest. The priest alone could readmit him to the congregation.

And another excerpt I googled upon....


But what, it may be said, doth this saying, "Show thyself to the priest," contribute to the keeping of the law? No little. Because it was an ancient law, that the leper when cleansed should not entrust to himself the judgment of his cleansing, but should show himself to the priest, and present the demonstration thereof to his eyes, and by that sentence be numbered amongst the clean. For if the priest said not "The leper is cleansed," he remained still with the unclean without the camp.

what stands out to me in the above snippet is that the leper could not entrust to himself the judgment of his cleansing but should show himself to the priest......for if the priest said not "the leper is cleansed" he remained unclean. So if this leper had not submitted to the "legal machinery of the day" though healed of the disease he would have still been a leper in the eyes of the community and in the eyes of the law. He would have still been an outcast. Of course Jesus knew this and acted accordingly. In another snippet I came upon it points out the following:

At times Jesus works outside the system. He either violates or ignores ritual laws re: healing on the Sabbath or cleaning his hands. Here he works within the system. Go, show yourself. This is the difference. Whatever is best for the person involved. If there is a rule against healing and a person needs healing, he breaks the rule. People first. This time, however, it is better for the man to be identified. He has had a very serious skin ailment, one for which there was no known cure. Therefore the leper and all like him were quarantined. They had to stay away from other folks. The one who could allow him back into society was the priest. Go show yourself to the priest so he can give you the ok to be a part of society again. With the priest's ok the man can return to communal life, including life in the temple.

So it is not that Jesus is endorsing the sacrificial system as it stood...but that he was in this instance working within the system to restore the man to complete wholeness. And then I happened upon another snippet that pretty much summed it up for me...

Wherefore he saith, "Show thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded." He said not, "which I command," but for a time remits him to the law.

I think the process to bring mankind out of the sacrificial mindset could not occur overnight and had to be a gradual process. That is in keeping with my beliefs that the ordinances and directives about sacrifice were to LIMIT it....not to initiate it. Sacrifice was so deeply ingrained in the hearts of men that it was an instinctual requirement of continued existence. If Girard (and like theories) are right and this scapegoating, sacred violence, sacrificial mindset was from the foundation of the world...and is what actually ensured that mankind did not destroy itself with its cycles of chaos and violence caused by mimetic rivalry then without a great deal of enlightenment, it is not something that could be eliminated by Jesus simply saying, "hey...no more sacrifice." Jesus provided that enlightenment by his example and his willing sacrifice of self to in part uncover the ugly little secret hiding in mankind's closet.....although it is a long, long process which is still in progress to this day) So anyway...that is how I reconcile those verses in which Jesus seemingly condoned sacrifice when he very clearly and blatantly proclaimed, ""But if you had known what this means, 'I desire mercy and not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the guiltless." -- Matthew 12:7